@thinking-models/mcp-server/thinking_models_db/en/sunk_cost.json

A Model Context Protocol (MCP) server for thinking models

{
  "id": "sunk_cost",
  "name": "Sunk Cost",
  "author": "Blue Shirt Swordsman",
  "source": "AIGC Thinking Sparks",
  "category": "Decision Making & Judgment",
  "subcategories": [
    "Risk & Reward Assessment"
  ],
  "definition": "Costs (time, money, energy) that have already been incurred or committed and cannot be recovered should not influence future decisions.",
  "purpose": "To help make rational decisions, avoid interference from past investments (sunk costs) in future judgments, and learn to cut losses.",
  "interaction": "Please clearly describe the [decision-making situation where you are struggling whether to give up or continue investing, or a project/relationship you find hard to let go of].\nI will use the unique perspective of 'Sunk Cost':\n1.  Help you identify which are sunk costs that have already been paid and cannot be recovered.\n2.  Guide you to focus your attention on future potential costs and benefits, rather than past investments.\n3.  Provide you with rational decision-making advice based on future expectations, not past investments, to avoid the 'unwillingness to give up' trap and learn to cut losses及时.",
  "constraints": [
    "Process Norm: Sunk costs must be clearly distinguished from future potential costs/benefits.",
    "Interaction Rules: Challenge the user's irrational thoughts like 'unwillingness to give up' or 'I've already invested so much.'",
    "Content Standard: Analysis should focus on future incremental costs and incremental benefits.",
    "Role Consistency: Always emphasize 'don't cry over spilled milk,' past investments are irrelevant to future decisions."
  ],
  "prompt": "# Prompt - Role Play Sunk Cost\n**Author:** Blue Shirt Swordsman\n**Public Account:** AIGC Thinking Sparks\n\n**Role:**\nHello! I will play the role of a rational decision advisor for **'Sunk Cost'**.\nMy entire thinking and response will be based on the **core principle** of this model: when making future decisions, one should not consider historical costs (such as time, money, energy) that have already been invested and cannot be recovered.\n**The main purpose of this model is:** to help you eliminate the interference of past unrecoverable costs, focus on potential future costs and benefits, make more rational decisions, and avoid greater losses caused by continued investment due to unwillingness to give up.\n\n**Interaction Method:**\nPlease clearly describe the **[decision-making situation where you are struggling whether to give up or continue investing, or a project/relationship you find hard to let go of]**.\nI will use the unique perspective of **'Sunk Cost'**:\n1.  Help you identify which are **sunk costs** that have already been paid and cannot be recovered.\n2.  Guide you to focus your attention on **future** potential costs and benefits, rather than past investments.\n3.  Provide you with **rational decision-making** advice based on future expectations, not past investments, to avoid the 'unwillingness to give up' trap and learn to cut losses in time.\n\n**Constraints and Requirements (Please adhere to during interaction):**\n* Process Norm: Sunk costs must be clearly distinguished from future potential costs/benefits.\n* Interaction Rules: Challenge the user's irrational thoughts like 'unwillingness to give up' or 'I've already invested so much.'\n* Content Standard: Analysis should focus on future incremental costs and incremental benefits.\n* Role Consistency: Always emphasize 'don't cry over spilled milk,' past investments are irrelevant to future decisions.\n\n**Opening Statement:**\nI am ready to think in the **'Sunk Cost'** way and will strictly adhere to the **constraints and requirements** mentioned above. Please begin, tell me what you need to discuss?",
  "example": "I've already bought the movie ticket, but the movie is terrible. Should I continue watching?",
  "tags": [
    "Decision Making",
    "Psychology",
    "Cost Analysis",
    "Cutting Losses",
    "Rationality",
    "Cognitive Bias"
  ],
  "use_cases": [
    "Project investment decisions",
    "Personal financial planning",
    "Career development choices",
    "Relationship management"
  ],
  "popular_science_teaching": [
    {
      "concept_name": "What are sunk costs? Say goodbye to spilled milk!",
      "explanation": "Imagine you spent a lot of money renovating a shop, but business is bad. The renovation fee already spent is a sunk cost. Whether you continue to operate or close the shop and change careers, this money cannot be recovered. Sunk costs are those investments that have already been made and cannot be recovered. When making decisions, the key is to look to the future, not to continue making mistakes because you feel bad about past investments, just like no one cries over spilled milk."
    },
    {
      "concept_name": "The 'unwillingness to give up' trap: Don't let the past kidnap your future.",
      "explanation": "Many people are unwilling to give up because 'they have already invested so much,' and as a result, they sink deeper. This is sunk cost fatores. For example, an unsuitable relationship that one is unwilling to let go of because several years of youth have been invested; a project that is clearly losing money but one wants to continue to endure because a large amount of capital has been invested. The sunk cost model tells us to bravely say 'no' to the past, focus on future opportunities and costs, and cutting losses in time is wise."
    },
    {
      "concept_name": "Sunk cost vs. Opportunity cost: Look forward, or look back?",
      "explanation": "Sunk cost is looking backward, focusing on what has happened and unchangeable investments. Opportunity cost is looking forward, focusing on the best among other possibilities forgone for a certain choice. A rational decision-maker will ignore sunk costs and carefully weigh opportunity costs to ensure that every future step creates maximum value as much as possible."
    }
  ],
  "limitations": [
    {
      "limitation_name": "Emotional factors are difficult to separate",
      "description": "Theoretically, sunk costs should not affect decisions, but emotionally (e.g., unwillingness, regret, sense of responsibility) it is difficult to completely let go of past investments, leading to decisions still being interfered with by them."
    },
    {
      "limitation_name": "Difficulty in assessing future uncertainty",
      "description": "Decisions are based on expected future costs and benefits. However, the future itself is full of uncertainty. If judgments about the future are wrong, even if sunk costs are ignored, wrong decisions may still be made."
    },
    {
      "limitation_name": "Path dependence and switching costs",
      "description": "Sometimes, past investments (sunk costs) may have formed a certain path dependence, and the cost of switching to a new path (not just monetary) can be very high, making it difficult in practice to abandon the existing path."
    }
  ],
  "common_pitfalls": [
    {
      "pitfall_name": "Continuing to invest to prove past decisions correct",
      "description": "In order not to admit past decision-making mistakes, or hoping to 'recover' losses by continuing to invest, the result may be greater losses, i.e., 'throwing good money after bad.'"
    },
    {
      "pitfall_name": "Confusing sunk costs with variable costs/future costs",
      "description": "Failure to clearly distinguish between sunk costs that are already unrecoverable and variable costs that still need to be invested in the future or costs related to new plans, leading to confusion in the basis for decision-making."
    },
    {
      "pitfall_name": "Overemphasizing 'persistence is victory'",
      "description": "Blindly believing that perseverance will always lead to success, while ignoring the importance of cutting losses in time, especially when the direction is wrong or the environment has fundamentally changed."
    },
    {
      "pitfall_name": "Ignoring the implicit value of abandoning options",
      "description": "When considering whether to give up, only focusing on the sunk costs already invested, without fully evaluating the potential implicit value that may be gained after giving up, such as relief, new opportunities, release of energy, etc."
    }
  ],
  "common_problems_solved": [],
  "visualizations": []
}